Neighbors press concerns as developer presents 20‑unit proposal for Niagara Street site

A developer seeking to convert a vacant former Navistar parcel on Niagara Street into a multi‑unit residential project presented an early consultation to the Waukesha Plan Commission and encountered significant neighborhood pushback over density, parking and notification.

Doug (planning staff) described the parcel as roughly 0.75 acres and said it is currently zoned M‑1 (light manufacturing), so any residential development would require rezoning to a residential district and possibly a Planned Unit Development (PUD) because the initial layout appears to conflict with new setback rules. Staff flagged parking relief, the need for a PUD to trade setbacks for other public benefits, and neighborhood engagement before formal rezoning.

Developer D'Won (Tajuan) Cherry said the project had been scaled back from 24 to 20 units in response to early feedback and that he intends to include a subset of affordable units. He said the team is pursuing local funding sources including Waukesha HOME funds and county growth funds and that proposed rents would reflect HUD standards for affordable units. "We want to make sure we add that affordability component," Cherry said, noting the financial challenges of subsidized housing and his intention to partner with local programs.

Residents who live on and near Niagara Street urged greater notice and raised practical concerns: the neighborhood’s parking is already strained during events at Frame Park; property lines and existing driveways are irregular; several residents said the lot is not truly vacant and that on‑site vehicles already occupy the space. Neighbors asked how notices would be handled; staff said formal rezoning would trigger mailed notice to property owners within 300 feet and additional public hearings and that the alderman (Mike Christine) would be a point of contact.

Commissioners reviewed design options and suggested changes to reduce setback conflicts, including consolidating buildings, rotating unit plans, or converting northerly buildings into a single larger building. Commissioners also recommended a neighborhood meeting before any formal rezoning or PUD petition so residents can provide input and the developer can refine plans. Several commissioners emphasized the importance of balancing added housing supply with on‑street parking impacts and compatible scale with adjacent single‑family homes.

No formal action was taken; staff and the commission encouraged the developer to hold a neighborhood meeting and to coordinate with the alderman and staff before filing any rezoning petition or PUD application.